Talk:Wealthy historical figures 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is there a citation for the George Washington number? I saw a few articles where he was only quoted at around 200 million. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.69.181 (talk) 01:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
The fact that there is not ONE member of the Rothschild family, must give an indication that the variables to make this list, are unsound. Stijn Calle 10:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Using the percentage of GDP method is the wrong method in comparing wealth of different generations. The only factor that matters is purchasing power. If the appreciation of Rockefeller's and Ford's fortune were correct, one of Henry Ford's workers, who earned 5 US-$ a day then, would have earned between 896.5 $(179.3 * 5) and 1,288 $(257.6 * 5) a day (assuming that Rockfeller's and Ford's fortunes were around one billion then). GDP just measures the yearly output of an economy. You do not get poorer because another company opens and increases the GDP. However, according to the above methodology, you would be poorer, because your share of the GDP has decreased. The only factor that counts is inflation. How much could you purchase then for a dollar compared to today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.58.57.25 (talk) 11:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
From what I can gather Stephen Van Rensselaer was the 10th richest man ever from his ownership of 1250 sq. miles of upstate New York, yet Leopold II, private owner of 905,000 sq miles of Congo, doesn't even make the top 100? Is it just me or does the calculation seem suspect? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.130.17 (talk) 21:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Sam Walton - new (real) weatlh (58.6)
According to Forbes today there was an article that came out today (9/17/2007) that says Sam Walton is really worth $58.6 billion in todays terms and if he was alive.
Someone needs to move him up and take care of that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Please stop changing Rockefellers wealth. He is worth $305.3 billion. Thats according to the new Forbes listing of the 2007 market. Keep it at 305.3 from now on!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Micheal Dell - wealth estimate
Micheal Dell's wealth needs to be changed. He was actually topped out at 20 billion during the tech boom of 1999. please change that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rockefeller's Wealth
Please note that Rockefeller's wealth on this page is actually 257.6 billion dollars, since this is the estimate for 2006 dollars (not 2007). The wealth number of 305.3 billion dollars is to be saved until the 2008 list. Until then, the number remains at 257.6 billion dollars. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 18:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Well then you need to check up on Forbes latest list and what that says. Because they say that he's worth $305.3 B and their research is never ever wrong. So keep I don't know what you mean by the 2008 list. Unles you're an editor of Forbes, we can't trust you. But we can the 2007 Forbes 400 list. So keep it at 305.3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I am not denying the published information from Forbes, yet the wealth estimate of 257.6 billion dollars was put on this list the minute that the 2007 article was started on Wikipedia. The 2008 list is suppose to mean that this list (like Wealthy historical figures 2007) is put on annually to record different changes throughout the years. The next list is due on January 13th 2008, as it says on the 2007 version. I will bring out the 2008 list with collect information from 2007, as I have done with the rest of the lists. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 16:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
My apologies. I just wanted an explanation as to why my numbers kept getting changed. Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it. I look forward to the next list. And can we do something about the current billionaires list? Take a look at the discussion and you'll know what I'm talking about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 04:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I believe that the current billionaires can be helped by additional information can be posted on the discussion page on this article, and if a typo or error is noticed and pointed out, then it can immediately be changed . However, new members for the list can only be put on the list one a year, to avoid any confusion. Yet, new or potential members or billionaires can be posted on the discussion and may be placed on the next list to come. Please being out any ideas, and I’ll strongly consider them. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 15:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Other Billionaires
Can someone please find out how much these people are worth too?
Ingvar Kamprad (Ikea)
Amancio Ortega (Zara)Inditex
David Thomson (Thomson Publishing)
Haven't seen any of those guys updated yet. Can anyone help me out and get their new net worths? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Release Date for 2008 List
Due to some technical mishaps, the 2008 list of Wealthy Historical Figures will be delayed to the next month, on February 3rd at 1:01pm. Sorry for the inconvenience that this postponement may have caused. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thats a bummer. I was really looking forward to this new list.
Also can someone please find the net worths of the 3 people I listed above? I would really appreciate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Whats the technical mishap you're having? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantheman88 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
The mishaps I am having with this list are the origination of list, the constant checking for errors, the Updates on the information before the list is published, yet it is also the missing GDP figures for 2007 or published in 2008 that I need to compute the current inflation amounts for the 2008 list. However, the list should be out at Feb.3rd 2008 and will have all the new information of 2008. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to hear that. Sounds like a grueling process. How is everybody's wealth looking this year so far? Have they gone down or up? Did the US economy have anything to do with it, like a weak dollar perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.244.148.116 (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
The process is not that difficult, it's just simply that the list needs updated infomation from Forbes, Government webpages that publish GDP figures, and other random websites. The list is expected to have at least 150 members, maybe more. The new billionaires on the list are mostly modern billionaires, since the number of billionaires in the world is increasing by more than a 100 each year. I do not think that there is any effect on this list by the US ecomony, or by the weak dollar, yet where converting the currency (e.g. pounds, francs), it does tend to put foriegn billionaires on a much higher level than before. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 23:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Wow. I guess if you keep holding it off it's a very large detail process. I was really hoping to get the list up to date and see the newest people and what the higher guys are worth now. Sorry to hear it has to be held off till March 1st. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.175.64 (talk) 19:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
It isn’t that bad, actually, the delay of this list is noting some events or news that I would have missed if I had put it on the date I said it would be. The new GDP figures for 2007 should be out on February 28th, afterwards the list will be updated a the historical figures put on. Sorry for the delays however. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Great news! The new list is available and on Wikipedia, click here to see. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 23:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Questions and suggestions
1. First thing. If this list has to be the list of richest people in world’s history, not history of particular country, historical figures should be ranked not by GDP of the country they lived in, but by the percentage of world’s GDP at the time when they lived. Two examples According to Wealthy 100 http://www.scottwinslow.com/2002/wealthy.asp John Hancock’s fortune in 1793 was worth 350.000 USD. At the exchange rate that year http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/exchangepound/result.php it was about 77.000 GBP. Few decades earlier annual income of Hungarian Prince Esterhazy was estimated at over 700.000 florins http://www.hungarianhistory.com/lib/macartney/macartney09.htm After conversion http://www.pierre-marteau.com/currency/converter.html you can find that it was over 100.000 GBP. Who was richer in terms of real value? Stephen Girard in 1831 was worth 7.5 mln USD. In 1836 Nathan Rothschild classified 61-th on the 250 Richest Britons Ever List http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/richest.pdf had fortune estimated at 4.2 mln GBP, after conversion about 20 mln USD (use measuringworth sites). No doubt, that Rothschild was richer at the time when they both lived, but he is not on the list because he lived in England. If he moved to America, he would be classified on top of this list with over 200 bln USD. Problem is that some countries in their history were not so rich country as they are today and reverse. At the end of XVIII century US share in world’s GDP was below 2%, in 1830 about 5%, in 1870 – 10%, today is over 25%. US share in world’s GDP is comparable to today’s since the time of World War I. So, the estimates concerning Americans living in XVIII and XIX centuries are seriously overestimated. That’s why, measuring wealth of individuals on the list in the percentage share in World’s GDP would make the results comparable.
2. Why members Walton family and the family as a whole occupy 7 separate positions on the list? It seems that source of their wealth are the same shares of Wal-Mart. If the Waltons are classified as a whole, why there are no other rich families like Astors or Vanderbilts? And if heirs of the fortunes should be included, why there is no for example William Henry Vanderbilt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Henry_Vanderbilt ? Using measuringworth sites you can calculate that 194 mln USD he left dying in 1875 was equal 1/60 US GDP, while his father’s 105 mln USD in 1877 was only 1/81 US GDP. And why 2 men Karl Albrecht and Theo Albrecht take 3 positions (No. 50, 59 and 87) on the list?
3.Why this list doesn’t include people from 250 Richest Britons Ever List. Its true, that England not always was so rich country as it is today, but since XVIII century (beginning of the Industrial Revolution) it belongs to richest countries in the world. So, at least Englishmen living in the last 250 years should be taken into consideration as the candidates to this list.
4.And some candidatures still living people to the list: -Johanna Quandt & family 18.4 bln USD (actually, today Quandt family as a whole should be worth much more, you should sum up wealth of Johanna Quandt her son Stefan Quandt and daughter Susanne Klatten from the latest Forbes list) http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2002/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2002&passListType=Person&uniqueId=324H&datatype=Person
-Philip Anschutz 18 bln USD http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2002/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2002&passListType=Person&uniqueId=324H&datatype=Person -Masayoshi Son 78 bln USD http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2000/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2000&passListType=Person&uniqueId=UQOA&datatype=Person (he never was classified on Forbes list with that wealth, but he was worth that much for short time during “internet bubble”), -Yasumitsu Shigeta 42 bln USD http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/73/R2X4.html (similar situation as the previous) -Mukesh Ambani – on 29th October 2007 the richest man in he world – 63.2 bln USD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukesh_Ambani -Kushal Pal Singh 35 bln USD http://www.forbes.com/2007/11/14/india-billionaires-richest-biz-07india-cx_nk_1114india_intro.html (by the way, data concernig Lakshmi Mittal i Anil Ambani – now respectively 51 and 45 bln USD - should be updated)
5. I can see on the list no historical figures outside USA. That means that authors didn’t do any research in this field. That doesn’t make this list credible source of information. It’s not difficult to find some candidates on the Web. Here are examples: - Osman Ali Khan, the last nizam of Hyderabad in India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osman_Ali_Khan%2C_Asif_Jah_VII according to Time Magazin in 1937 World’s Richest Man http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,770599-1,00.html ahead of J.D. Rockefeller, with fortune worth then 1.4 bln USD. Whether he was richer then Rockefeller is disputable, authors The Wealthy 100 say that Rockefeller dying in 1937 left 1.4 bln USD fortune, so their wealth at that time were equal - Krishna Raja Wadiyar IV Maharaja of Mysore with a personal fortune estimated in 1940 to be 400 mln USD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishnaraja_Wodeyar_IV - Pratapsinha Gaekwar Maharaja of Baroda estimated by Time Magazin at $300 million in 1939 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,799006,00.html - Simon Patiño, Bolivian, estimated in 1925 at 500 mln USD http://www.answers.com/topic/sim-n-iturri-pati-o and at the time of his death in 1947 at 900 mln USD http://www.hispaniconline.com/res&res/names/p.html His wealth was comparable to Henry Ford’s (died in 1949 later with fortune estimated at 1 bln USD). - Ferdinand Marcos – his wife Imelda claimed he was worth 35 bln USD in 1970’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imelda_Marcos , but it seems to be exaggerated. Sources usually estimate his fortune at 10 bln USD when he fled Philippines in 1986 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE7DD103AF931A15750C0A967958260 http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0545905/bio . Still much enough to get the place on the list -Prince Felix Yusupov, before the Russian Revolution richest private individual in Russia, estimated at 600 mln USDin 1917 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%A9lix_Youssoupoff That figure seems to be possible, because some estimated only real estate holdings belonged to Yusupovs at 350 mln USD http://www.royal-magazin.de/russia/jussupov/jussupov-ruby.htm -Anton Fugger worth at the time of his death in 1560 over 5-6 mln gulden, the same amount as annual income richest European monarch that time – Emperor Charles V. If you sum up state revenues in Spain, Belgium, Netherland and half of Italy (provinces of Charles V empire – colonies in America are not included), you will get more less the figure Fugger was worth then.
6.Rothschilds – nobody would believe, that list of richest people in history could be without them. Except Nathaniel mentioned before I could find information about: -Albert Salomon Anselm - of Vienna branch of the family - worth 1 bln Kronen in 1910 http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Salomon_Anselm_von_Rothschild at exchange rate 1 USD – 5 Kronen, (currency converter is on measuringworth sites) his fortune was then estimated at 200 mln USD. World’s GDP was then about 180-190 bln USD. That means, that he had fortune equal about 0,11% of it (country he lived in - Austro-Hungary - doesn’t exist today, that’s another reason to use share in World’s GDP as the basis). In 2007 it would be more less 55-56 bln USD (2007 World’s GDP is estimated at 51.000 bln USD) -Wilhelm Carl – the last head of Frankfurt branch http://www.bornpower.de/rothdeut2.htm - worth in 1900 with family 430 mln Deutsche Mark http://www.bornpower.de/rothdeut.htm Exchange rate was 1 USD – 4,20 DM, so he was then worth over 100 mln USD, about 0,07% World’s GDP then. Today this would be about 35-36 bln USD. The two above represent Austrian and German branches of the family, but remember that French and English branches were considered to be richer.
7. Probably the richest man in history was Tsar of Russia – Nicholas II Romanov. His fortune before the Russian Revolution in 1917 was estimated by The New York Times in 1920-th at 30 bln USD http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/stranger-than-fiction/anastasia.html Similar figure you can find on other sites http://hubpages.com/hub/Tsar_Nicholas_II_and_the_Romanov_family But financial analyst William Clarke in his book “The lost fortune of the Tsars” estimates wealth of the Romanovs even at 45 bln USD http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CEFDA1639F935A3575BC0A963958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all 30 bln USD in 1913 (before the outbreak of the WW I) would be about 15 % World’s GDP, 45 bln would make well over 20 %. In terms of today’s money it would be 7.5 – 11 trillion USD. Majordomus (talk) 22:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Majordomus
Thanks for your questions and suggestions, they have been put on the list and they should be on the list when it comes out. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
